International Law and the Northern Threat to Israel from Lebanon

In summation:

A. There is no formal border agreement between Israel and Lebanon.

B. However, there is a historical, accepted, internationally recognized border.

C. After Israel withdrew from Lebanon, Hezbollah found itself in need of a new purpose for its existence and operations. Therefore, despite it being rejected by the international community, the terror organization perpetuates the claim that Israel occupies Lebanese territory, in order to justify its continued so-called resistance – meaning acts of terror, strikes and provocations against Israel.

D. A distinction must be made between border points disagreements, regarding which the UN Secretary General has accepted Israel’s position, and territorial disputes. All territory formerly belonging to Syria is irrelevant to territorial disputes between Lebanon and Israel.

E. Both border points disagreements and territorial disputes are matters that pertain to the relations between the states of Lebanon and Israel. The terror organization Hezbollah has no status in this context.